It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: IAMTAT
I used to be on the fence about the hot tub kids, but after seeing the picture at 1:36, it puts a few things into context. The mere presence and playfulness of these children is enough to arouse the devil within.
This contribution deals with the Nachleben of the famous columnar device of emperor Charles V (1500-1558). Until recently, research on royal representations mainly focused on art forms like portraits or literary panegyrics. Nevertheless, the more abstract imagery of devices constituted the most expanded type of the visualization of power. Their polysemic nature made them into dynamic signs, who were subjected to a continuous process of appropriation and reinterpretation. Particular symbolism was constantly merged with other (textual) signifiers and iconographic elements, creating different meanings in different contexts. I will argue that this process of appropriation turned Charles’ device into a dynamic symbol serving the agenda of various groups in society, rather than the static representation of rulership. The possibility to detach from the individual connotation ensured that it remained a potent iconographic theme throughout the studied period. The iconographic production can be grouped into three ‘traditions’: the use of the device in the political field – by successors or political rivals − the application as a ‘sacral emblem’, and the discourse of seventeenth century science. Nevertheless, these various interpretations were all united by the same expression of an essential theme deeply rooted in early modern culture: transgressing boundaries and the search for divine truth.
The latinesque phrase Non plus ultra is well-known to historians of early modern science, because its antithesis—Charles V’s imperial motto, Plus ultra—was a familiar catch-cry for the new science. But there is much confusion about the origins of these expressions. One common account supposes some version of the negative tag to have been a standard classical motto, an injunction perhaps, attached to the Pillar of Hercules. This phrase was later inverted to provide the Imperial device (so goes this explanation) and the resulting positive phrase was interpreted as celebrating colonial expansion across the Atlantic. Rosenthal, however, has convincingly undermined this whole story: the ancient motto it posits simply did not exist; the modern was coined before Charles acquired his association with America. The present work refines Rosenthal’s argument. I uncover classical sources for the early modern motto, by invoking a more satisfactory version of the inversion thesis. I agree there was no set negative adage, but insist there was a set idea, occuring repeatedly, in texts quite familiar to the Renaissance. This idea is set in contexts that display a popular Urbild of the successful conqueror, a d is eventually projected onto Alexander. So it is an ideal source for imperial propoganda.
originally posted by: tiredoflooking
originally posted by: JanAmosComenius
originally posted by: Perfectenemy
Hmm. Stephen Hawking died at the age of 76. Odd timing.
Interesting hypothesis: He died long time ago and his media avatar was used as form of gatekeeper. May be there is no reason to keep him "alive" anymore?
I have such strong feelings about this too. No proof, but who can live to 76 with als? His "dying" concerns me. Like ushering in a new era. I feel like he was the gatekeeper of space or something from space. Will be watching what comes next.